On 4/8/2016 5:54 PM, Jay Faulkner wrote:
I know a lot of folks explicitly avoid a +0 vote with a comment because you don't get "credit" for it in statistics. Whether or not that should matter is another discussion, but there is a significant disincentive to no-voting right now. - Jay Faulkner ------------------------------------------------------------------------ *From:* Dolph Mathews <dolph.math...@gmail.com> *Sent:* Friday, April 8, 2016 1:54 PM *To:* OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) *Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [all][stackalytics] Gaming the Stackalytics stats On Friday, April 8, 2016, John Dickinson <m...@not.mn <mailto:m...@not.mn>> wrote: On 8 Apr 2016, at 13:35, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2016-04-08 19:42:18 +0200 (+0200), Dmitry Tantsur wrote: >> There are many ways to game a simple +1 counter, such as +1'ing changes >> that already have at least 1x +2, or which already approved, or which need >> rechecking... > [...] > > The behavior which baffles me, and also seems to be on the rise > lately, is random +1 votes on changes whose commit messages and/or > status clearly indicate they should not merged and do not need to be > reviewed. I suppose that's another an easy way to avoid the dreaded > "disagreements" counter? > -- > Jeremy Stanley I have been told that some OpenStack on boarding teaches new members of the community to do reviews. And they say, effectively, "muddle through as you can. You won't understand it all at first, but do your best. When you're done, add a +1 and move to the next one" I advocate for basically this, but instead of a +1, leave a +0 and ask questions. The new reviewer will inevitably learn something and the author will benefit by explaining their change (teaching is the best way to learn). I've been working to correct this when I've seen it, but +1 reviews with no comments might not be people trying to game. It might simply be people trying to get involved that don't know any better yet. --John __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
There is also disincentive in +1ing a change that you don't understand and is wrong and then a core comes along and -1s it (you get dinged for the disagreement). And there is disincentive in -1ing a change for the wrong reasons (silly nits or asking questions for understanding). I ask a lot of questions in a lot of changes and I don't vote on those because it would be inappropriate.
I also notice when "newcomers" are asking good questions for understanding and not voting on them, it shows me they are trying to learn and are getting invested in the project, not just trying to pad stats. Those are the people we look to mentor into bigger roles in the project team, be that working on subteams or eventually looking at for the core reviewer team.
-- Thanks, Matt Riedemann __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
